Filmmaker, Esther Eng.
Esther Eng was born Ng Kam-ha on September 24, 1914 in San Francisco, California. She was the first female director to direct Chinese-language films in the United States. The majority of Ms. Eng’s films are lost, unfortunately.
Following up on my last post about being a bit unimpressed with Pacific Rim’s supposed progressiveness, let’s consider these facts about Esther Eng’s career in film:
- She directed a film in 1937 called “National Heroine” about a Chinese woman fighter pilot who goes to war against Japan and gives her life for the greater good of her country. This was in 1937, folks, and this pilot wasn’t a co-protagonist, she was the heroine.
- Following up on the success of her war movie, Eng totally changed directions and made two Hong Kong films titled "Ten Thousand Lovers" and "Husband and Wife For One Night". I’m not even sure a woman director in Hollywood today could make movies with those titles.
- Next she made a film called "Women’s World" consisting of an all-female cast, showcasing women’s success in a variety of different professions.
- In 1939, she began distributing her films in Central and South America.
- In 1941, she made "Golden Gate Girl" drawn from her experiences as a Chinese American woman in San Francisco.
- She made two films in 1949 about inter-cultural and inter-racial relationships: “Too Late For Springtime” was about a Chinese girl’s relationship with a Chinese American GI; and “Mad Love Mad Fire” was a film shot in Hawaii about a mixed race woman and a Chinese sailor.
Every single one of Esther Eng’s movies were about women. She was also openly lesbian, which did not affect her film-making career because she came from a Chinese opera background in which this was accepted as normal. In the 1950s, she went into the restaurant business and opened five restaurants in Manhattan. She died of cancer at age 55 in 1970.
In April 2013, a documentary about Esther Eng’s life named “Golden Gate Silver Light” premiered at the Hong Kong Film Festival.
What was I saying again about Pacific Rim and progressiveness? Forget it. Just remember Esther Eng.
The meta sequel to that dumb frank video that got popular
THIS IS MY NEW FAVOURITE LINE
when I say “lmao” I do not mean “laughing my ass off” I mean “lmao”
Anonymous said: I have a question regarding the submission about d*kes and male privilege. I used to identify as a dyke, and now identify as genderqueer, and in both instances, I've been informed that I have male/male-passing/masculine privilege. I didn't want to refute this, because I'm concerned that would be an example of exercising that privilege and mansplaining, etc. But that submission seemed to suggest that that sort of idea was nonsense. Do you mods or other followers have any input on this?
telling a someone who identifies as a women she has male privilege because of the way she dresses. or acts, or displays her gender in any way, is bullshit. but i’m not pretending to be an expert on gender, and gender expression vis-a-vis oppression. Perhaps the followers would be better at explaining this? Or linking to someone who could better answer your question.
Just … I’m not really believing the whole “some women have male privilege” shit, from what I can tell, it usually ends up transphobic, transmisogynistic, cissexist, lesbophobic, homophobic, biphobic, and a bunch of other shit.
This anon’s ask is such a prime example of why more and more I hate what the conversation about Privilege has turned into. Privilege is a very real thing and people need to be aware of their own privileges in order to be part of a nuanced conversation and play an active role in breaking down the establishment of oppression and build a more equal society.
What Privilege is not is a “Get out of an argument free” card. It is not something someone can just toss on another person, find some weak justification for why they have privilege and then dismiss anything they have to say after that as being exercising that privilege. I get so sick of seeing marginalized queer identities tossing privilege arguments back and forth at each other without a trace of intersectional awareness. Saying that a genderqueer AFAB has male privilege is like saying that a trans woman who can live stealth has cis privilege. Just stop it.
I throw side eyes at any position where any and all counterpoints are then used as examples of why it is right. If you’re not open to respectful debate about your opinions and ideas then how can you truly say they actually have merit? Instead it sounds like when conspiracy theorists use legit explanations as proof that there’s a coverup and the conspiracy is thus real. ”Chemtrails exist!” “My cousin works for the airline, that’s not what that is.” “Your cousin must be in on it! And they lied to you, so clearly they’re hiding something!”
sometimes the ones we love the hurt the most are the closest the ones that we love the least the most love hurt sometimes
When I find out a cute boy isn’t gay